[RJF]

Has anyone heard any fuel economy (MPG) figures or projections for the car?

[Exitspeed]

They haven't said jack about fuel economy. I'd bet this thing will get 30mpg.

[scoobie]

2700lbs +\-, 2.0l direct injection will get great mpg, I'll agree about 30mpg.

[Cal]

I think the suby will get around 19/24

[ej25ti]

Originally Posted by Cwrigh25

I think the suby will get around 19/24

about what my STi gets stock...

for the Toyota though... I'm gonna guess about 21/28

[SUPRAtruc2JZGE]

Yah FT86 is going to get 50/100.....just kidding just kidding....my guess 23-28/29-35 on FT86. 216A umm I still not sure what is the official specs yet. (???RWD, AWD, N/A, Turbo???) So, I can't say or guess.

[Ethanislame]

If the original AE86 got great gas mileage than more than likely FT86 will as well.

[Terrari]

Poor economy fuels the enthusiast's soul.

[ProZach626]

If this car gets poor mileage, I'll probably be more inclined to go the route of the 2012 focus st.

[Cal]

Power =/= mileage.

I'd rather get tahoe gas mileage and be able to haul ass than get focus mileage and be slow.

[ZDan]

Light weight and decent aero => good mileage, power =/= mileage isn't necessarily true. A 426hp 3300 lb. Corvette is rated 26mpg highway. No reason a significantly lighter-weight (it *better* be, anyway) 4cylinder shouldn't do quite a bit better than that.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Terrari

Poor economy fuels the enthusiast's soul.

Really?
For a *long* time, the original Elise had the HIGHEST observed fuel economy in the back of Road&Track where they compare stats of cars.

Personally, I think the true minimalist light-weight sports car enthusiast would be better served if they jacked CAFE standards to the sky. Then we might have some reasonably light-weight (or at least less obscenely OVERweight) performance cars to choose from!

Sick of all the overweight pigs on the market, here's hoping Toyota gets this one RIGHT (i.e., LIGHT).

[Cal]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Light weight and decent aero => good mileage, power =/= mileage isn't necessarily true. A 426hp 3300 lb. Corvette is rated 26mpg highway. No reason a significantly lighter-weight (it *better* be, anyway) 4cylinder shouldn't do quite a bit better than that.

26 mpg?!

My fail40SX only gets 28mpg highway.

[Terrari]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Light weight and decent aero => good mileage, power =/= mileage isn't necessarily true. A 426hp 3300 lb. Corvette is rated 26mpg highway. No reason a significantly lighter-weight (it *better* be, anyway) 4cylinder shouldn't do quite a bit better than that.

Put your foot into the injectors and the mileage on that corvette will drop as the fun level rises.

Any car can get great mileage if you drive with an egg under your foot, but are you having fun driving that way? Hell No! You want great gas mileage, get an econo-box.

[ej25ti]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Really?
For a *long* time, the original Elise had the HIGHEST observed fuel economy in the back of Road&Track where they compare stats of cars.

people don't buy lotus' for their MPG's 0_o

[West]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Sick of all the overweight pigs on the market, here's hoping Toyota gets this one RIGHT (i.e., LIGHT).

Totally agree! Give us what sparked our interest in this car.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Terrari

Put your foot into the injectors and the mileage on that corvette will drop as the fun level rises.

Any car can get great mileage if you drive with an egg under your foot,

Not true. Fuel economy ratings for cars are for the same driving conditions (pretty low-acceleration/low speed vs. real-world) whatever the car, and there is a WIDE disparity between Prii and Hummers. "Any car" can NOT get great mileage!

but are you having fun driving that way? Hell No!

I drive my cars like hell at the track. On the streets in town and on the highway, I drive like a normal competent conscientious driver. Are you suggesting that any enthusiast should ALWAYS be "on it"? It's simply not practical to drive fast on the street 99% of the time. Of course there are always those who *think* they're "fast" on the street, but are merely driving like d-b's...

You want great gas mileage, get an econo-box.

One of the most important things for performance, LIGHT WEIGHT, is GOOD for gas mileage.

I want a smallish, minimalist, lightweight, decent power/weight performance-oriented car, and yes, I WANT great (or at least decent) fuel mileage, why not?

Consider RX-8 vs. S2000: Would you prefer the '8 *because* it gets much WORSE fuel economy?

Getting poor fuel economy doesn't imply stellar performance, and getting decent fuel economy doesn't imply poor performance.

BTW, econo-boxes can make GREAT performance car platforms, as they're usually pretty lightweight. Much easier to add meaningful power than it is to subtract a meaningful amount of weight. Shelby GLH-S Omni from the 80s comes to mind. My only problem with econo-boxes is that they're almost all wrong-wheel-drive...

[ej25ti]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Not true.

partly true

YouTube - Prius More Enviromentally Damaging Than BMW M3

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by ej25ti

partly true

YouTube - Prius More Enviromentally Damaging Than BMW M3

Top Gear is a fantastically entertaining show. But that is by any stretch not a valid comparison between a Prius and an M3!

Easy enough to take a lower-performing car on much lower-performance tires, and SCRUB SCRUB SCRUB as much as possible in cornering around a track, then do equal (or faster) laps in a perfomance car with performance tires at 6/10ths, not scrubbing any energy away, and get better fuel economy.

TG aren't above faking stuff to get their desired show, as well! They showed themselves pushing a Tesla as if the battery pack was depleted when it was not.

Show biz, NOT science.

I *totally* stand by my refutation of the comment that "Any car can get great mileage if you drive with an egg under your foot,".
Totally, obviously, INCORRECT.

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Cal

26 mpg?!

My fail40SX only gets 28mpg highway.

I could get 30+ in my '91 and my '95 240SXs.
Hell, I got 28mpg highway in my '95 Z28 M6 convertible! But it got much worse overall fuel economy than the SXs, ~22mpg for ~30/70 city/hwy vs. ~26mpg combined with the SXs.

I would expect that a ~2750 lb. FR-S with a 2.0-2.5 liter 4-cylinder, with a decently tallish top gear should end up being rated somewhere around 20/28, and should be able to get over 30mpg on the highway at 75mph.

[ej25ti]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Top Gear is a fantastically entertaining show. But that is by any stretch not a valid comparison between a Prius and an M3!

Easy enough to take a lower-performing car on much lower-performance tires, and SCRUB SCRUB SCRUB as much as possible in cornering around a track, then do equal (or faster) laps in a perfomance car with performance tires at 6/10ths, not scrubbing any energy away, and get better fuel economy.

TG aren't above faking stuff to get their desired show, as well! They showed themselves pushing a Tesla as if the battery pack was depleted when it was not.

Show biz, NOT science.

I *totally* stand by my refutation of the comment that "Any car can get great mileage if you drive with an egg under your foot,".
Totally, obviously, INCORRECT.

right I wasn't saying that every car has the capability of getting good mpg, what I was trying to get across is that the way you drive your car IS a factor
hence why i said partly